Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-06-28
TIE JUDICIARY AMENDMENT.
An Important Amendment TO 30 Yotzd
Ga IN August.
Ircnrt-IlI. IInrnld


CrCeEvllIe Herald
! OF equal importance, at least 10 the
prohibition amendment, is the proposed
amendment 20 the iudicisry article of our
constitution. The present judiciary arti-
Gle was 4 compromise, agreed upon with
much reluctance by he learned iurists
who were members Of the convention
that framed our present organic law.
The creation Of County courts as inter
mediate tribunals between the Justice
and District courts were ventures
IN this state. Experience has taught
rs that while the system may be 2
good one, amendments ore necessary to
avoid conflicts and 10 give the courts
power TO determine issues eff citing the
rights of the citizen. For instance, the
Court Ct Appeals has appellant juris-
dictlon II Cases appealed from the
County courts, both civil and criminal.
The Supreme court has iGrisdics on OF
civil cases appealed from the District
courts, aDd The Court of Appeals has
jurisdiction of all criminal cases ap-
pesled. Judges differ iu their
views Of the law, and on account
OF this, these two courts
have seriously coLhiCted in several in
portant rulings in civil cases. For in
stance the Court OF Appeals mas decided
that the county or justice court could not
enforce attachment or other liens on land.
Under this ruling, uutil recent act of
the Legislature cured the objection,
man could not attach lands on II claim of
less than $500. The Supreme court held
differently.
ASain,the Court Of Appeals decided that
wnen a railroad company or other agency
burned grass or destroyed growing crops
on the land Of person, he could onlv
recover the difference between the value
OF The land before and after the burn. |
Ihe Supreme court held that the party
c0uIG recover the value of the property |
destroyed.
Inc Court of Appeals decided citizen |
OF this state could not sue citizen of !
another state in this state without at |
taching property. .The Supreme court
neld It could be done. There are many
other questions on which these courts
llHer put these Instances suffice 10 show
mat II Is best to adopt the judiciary
amendment which gives appellant iuTis-
Ilctlon OF all civil cases TO the Supreme
court. Besides, tae Supreme court is
behind With its WORK. Under the consti.
utlon as it now is, the court consists
II three judges. In order 10 ena-
lie this court 10 do the work
mas TO do, the Legislature some siy
ears sgo created the commission of ap.
'eals, court OF three Judges at the same
aiary as the Supreme court, to help it
YORK of its business The Supreme
curt had ali their opinions to examine.
mis- takes much time. The proposed
mepdment ooes ewaY with this auxiliary !
curt and adds IN its stead two more
Judges to the Supreme court, making five
instead OF six, at the same salary. For
his reason the amendment should be
dopted. Another reason: There are @
asst number of cases and controversies l
nat no court has any right to determine. e
ontests of stock law elections, county Y
sat contests, and in fact all other cleo a
ons with but few exceptions cannot be de.
'rmlnea oy any court, no matter how s
rong the canvassiEg board may have 6,
cen In Its decision. The action of the 3
court cannot be ap- b
saIed from, 1t matters not how much il "
ay be in error. The proposed amend b
ent cnres these defects in our present II
and makes the district b,
urts OF general Jurisdiction. County h,
q justice courts remain as they are &
w, leaving the matter of their exist b.
&c and jurisdiction entirely with the W
glslature. The Legislature also has th
rlSht to create such other courts as or
needs of q growing state may de- VI
IND. Take it altogether, the judiciary of
lendment should he adopted. ha